On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 16:34 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> Also, another expected problem is that neither card->card_dev nor
> card->dev are set when snd_card_err() is called. Many drivers set the
> device pointers at the late stage just before the device
> registration. So, systematic replacements
At Fri, 31 May 2013 11:33:44 -0400 (EDT),
Alan Stern wrote:
>
> On Fri, 31 May 2013, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> > > struct snd_card contains pointers to two different devices: dev and
> > > card_dev. Some contexts might want to use one of them for log messages
> > > while other contexts might wan
On Fri, 31 May 2013, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > struct snd_card contains pointers to two different devices: dev and
> > card_dev. Some contexts might want to use one of them for log messages
> > while other contexts might want to use the other.
>
> Yes, there are some corner cases, indeed.
>
> A
At Fri, 31 May 2013 10:24:51 -0400 (EDT),
Alan Stern wrote:
>
> On Fri, 31 May 2013, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> > > I don't see the complexity/hell in adding functions
> > > for specific types of struct * to reduce the complexity
> > > of the code though. Centralizing those indirections
> > > into
On Fri, 31 May 2013, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > I don't see the complexity/hell in adding functions
> > for specific types of struct * to reduce the complexity
> > of the code though. Centralizing those indirections
> > into functions also generally reduces overall code size.
>
> I don't mind to ad
At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:38:01 -0700,
Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 09:35 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:30:09 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 09:23 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:06:07 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
>
On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 09:35 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:30:09 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 09:23 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:06:07 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 08:37 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> >
At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:30:09 -0700,
Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 09:23 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:06:07 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 08:37 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > I think most of snd_printd() and snd_printdd() can be ke
On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 09:23 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:06:07 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 08:37 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > I think most of snd_printd() and snd_printdd() can be kept as is.
> > > These are just debug messages, after all.
> > Some
At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:06:07 -0700,
Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 08:37 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > It's a problem only with snd_printk(), as CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK
> > influences on the behavior of snd_printk() and not on the debug prints
> > with snd_printd() & co.
>
> Are
On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 08:37 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> It's a problem only with snd_printk(), as CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK
> influences on the behavior of snd_printk() and not on the debug prints
> with snd_printd() & co.
Are you're perhaps confused about how CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK
works with
At Thu, 30 May 2013 20:49:09 +0200,
Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
>
> Date 30.5.2013 20:14, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 May 2013, Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 15:27 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> >>> Has there been any thought of improving snd_printk(), or even better,
> >>> changi
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 15:43 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
>
> > Date 30.5.2013 20:14, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Wed, 29 May 2013, Joe Perches wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 15:27 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > >>> Has there been any thought of im
On Thu, 30 May 2013, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> Date 30.5.2013 20:14, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 May 2013, Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 15:27 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> >>> Has there been any thought of improving snd_printk(), or even better,
> >>> changing the call sites
Date 30.5.2013 20:14, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2013, Joe Perches wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 15:27 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
>>> Has there been any thought of improving snd_printk(), or even better,
>>> changing the call sites to use the dev_*() routines instead?
>>
>> Perhaps bette
15 matches
Mail list logo
